Exploring the connection between frustration and consumer choice behavior in a dynamic decision environment

Abstract

This research proposes that frustration during the purchase process for high-technology durable goods has a significant effect on the probability that consumers will commit to a technology and make a purchase. In order to explore the effects of consumer frustration on the purchase process, a scale is developed that reveals that frustration in high-technology decision environments is composed of two dimensions, processing frustration and frustration with the pace of technological change. These dimensions of frustration have a significant effect on consumer choice behavior. While processing frustration significantly reduces the probability of commitment to a technology, the probability of making a decision is significantly lower when consumers are frustrated with the pace of technological change. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Given the rapidly changing marketplace for consumer high-technology durable goods, it is crucial that marketers understand and eliminate as Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 21(12) 1059 many barriers to purchase as possible. Although rational barriers to purchase clearly exist, very little attention has been paid to the emotional barriers that may lead to purchase postponement or nonpurchase. Previous research on the impact of emotions on information processing and decision making suggests that negative emotions arising from trade-off difficulty may bring about coping activities that alter decision outcomes (Luce, Bettman, & Payne, 2001). Negative emotions have also been shown to impact scrutiny of advertising messages (Krishnamurthy & Sivaraman, 2002), and to result in behavioral manifestations such as purchase postponement or delay (Frijda, 1986(Frijda, , 1988. The goal of this research is to explore the effects of one particular negative emotion, frustration, on the purchase process for highinvolvement goods in dynamic choice environments.:Technology products play an integral role in contemporary life and as such consumers have learned to anticipate an ongoing cycle of technological improvements and decreasing prices that require consumers to consider not only what to buy, but when to buy it (Joerges, 1988). From a cognitive standpoint, the rapid pace of innovation in the technology marketplace complicates the purchase process in the short term by rendering search information obsolete as new and improved products enter the market, and in the long run by forcing consumers to accept the constant changing of choice criteria, consideration sets, and the viability of chosen products (Bagozzi, Baumgartner, & Pieters, 1998;Namwoon, Rajendra, & Han, 2001;Venkatesh & Brown, 2001). Further complicating the process is the use of jargon with which the average consumer is unfamiliar (e.g., the product attributes offered for an entry-level digital camera) (Greenspan, 2003).This study suggests that frustration during the purchase process for high-technology durables stems from the complexity, ambiguity, and unavailability of information that is necessary for consumers to differentiate between competing...

Development and validation of the technology adoption propensity (TAP) index

“…Proficiency is identified as the second contributor rather than "innovativeness," as put forth in the TRI. This is perhaps not surprising given that new technologies have become more sophisticated over the last decade, and consumers' complexity expectations (Wood & Moreau, 2006) and degree of frustration (Strebel et al, 2004) with these new technologies has likely increased in response. Given the ubiquity of technology in contemporary society, it stands to reason that consumers' confidence in their ability to effectively learn and use new technologies has now become more critical to their adoption propensity than their sense of being a technology pioneer (as per the TRI).…”

“…In the decade since the TRI was published, researchers have discovered additional important components of consumers' relationships with new technologies, including fatigue from the increased number of features (Thompson et al, 2005), anxiety when considering using technology (Meuter, Ostrom, Bitner, & Roundtree, 2003), anticipation of enjoyment or fun derived from new technologies (Bruner & Kumar, 2005;Childers, Carr, Peckc, & Carson, 2001;Pagani, 2004), frustration with the complexity of new technologies (Strebel, O'Donnell, & Myers, 2004;Wood & Moreau, 2006), perceived risk of using a technology (Lam, Chiang, & Parasuraman, 2008) and confusion and a sense of being overwhelmed by technology (Turnbull, 2011).…”

Habit slips: when consumers unintentionally resist new products

“…After weighing the benefits against the cost, consumers may simply decide that the advantages of the new product are not worth the price. When consumers are faced with uncertainty as they make decisions about a new product, they may experience frustration and ultimately postpone adoption or reject the new product outright (Strebel et al 2004). …”

What moderates the too‐much‐choice effect?

“…Besides the structure of the assortment, whether a choice is difficult or not also depends on the applied decision strategy Hu, Huhmann, & Hyman 2007;Kozup & Creyer, 2006;Shanteau & Thomas, 2000;Strebel, O'Donnell, & Myers, 2004;White & Hoffrage, 2009;Jessup et al, 2009). The importance of decision strategies and individual differences in their use has been emphasized by research on adaptive decision making.…”